From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com (e37.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79C4D1A0190 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 18:19:40 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost by e37.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:19:38 -0700 Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.20]) by d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B912C1FF0043 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:07:45 -0700 (MST) Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u187JZwO30212190 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:19:35 -0700 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u187JZcu020986 for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:19:35 -0700 From: Stewart Smith To: Russell Currey , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] powerpc/powernv: Remove support for p5ioc2 In-Reply-To: <1454904500-11218-1-git-send-email-ruscur@russell.cc> References: <1454904500-11218-1-git-send-email-ruscur@russell.cc> Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 18:19:22 +1100 Message-ID: <87wpqfwtxh.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Russell Currey writes: > "p5ioc2 is used by approximately 2 machines in the world, and has never > ever been a supported configuration." > > The code for p5ioc2 is essentially unused and complicates what is already > a very complicated codebase. Its removal is essentially a "free win" in > the effort to simplify the powernv PCI code. > > In addition, support for p5ioc2 has been dropped from skiboot. There's no > reason to keep it around in the kernel. > > Signed-off-by: Russell Currey Yep, it's gone from firmware and there was only ever a handful of machines inside development labs inside IBM that had it. We may still have one in the lab, but I agree - it's not worth maintaining it. Acked-by: Stewart Smith -- Stewart Smith OPAL Architect, IBM.